The Iron Whirlygighttps://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com
Once More Into the BreechTue, 13 Feb 2018 14:59:32 +0000enhourly1http://wordpress.com/https://s2.wp.com/i/buttonw-com.pngThe Iron Whirlygighttps://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com
Dispelling the 90% Canardhttps://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/dispelling-the-90-percent-canard/
https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2013/07/10/dispelling-the-90-percent-canard/#respondWed, 10 Jul 2013 19:37:57 +0000http://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/?p=1039Since when do 90% of Americans agree on anything? Yet somehow, a push poll stat has wormed its way into the debate over firearms.

The problem with polls are that you can force a desired outcome from them. And both sides of any debate are capable doing such a thing.

However, this particular CBS News/New York Times Poll has garnered attention because it has been oft repeated by the President and many others trying limit our 2nd Amendment rights.

So, what did this poll consist of? The only question asked of 1110 adults nationwide was:

Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all potential gun buyers?

The only exception to this federal rule is private sales of firearms. That is, if I wanted to sell my privately, legally owned firearm to anyone else legally elligible to own a firearm. If I suspect or know that someone cannot legally posess one (like my neighbor with multiple felonies), I am prohibited from selling it to them. If unlawful activity were to occur as a result of that individual obtaining that firearm, it would inevitably point back to me, and I would face federal charges. Some states, themselves, prohibit private sales without background checks.

I think its safe to assume that the majority of Americans gun owners are responsible, and feel their government should trust their discression when it comes to private sales. Or, perhaps they don’t desire to pay a premium for a brand-new firearm from a dealer. So, they seek out folks they know in their community, or someone they can establish trust with, to purchase the type/make/model of firearm the desire for less than they’d pay at a formal dealer. And, again, the majority of Americans feel they should be treated as adults to make these decisions.

To that end, what the poll DIDN’T ask was…

“Do you favor or oppose a federal law requiring background checks on all sales, including private sales of guns (aka private property) ?”

I think we would be seeing some different results with this improved wording. So, I think we can speculate that the pollsters in question knew that such a phrasing would not obtain them the results they wanted. I mean, hell, I’d have a difficult time saying “no”… though in the back of my mind I would immediately question, “do they mean private sales, as well?”

Follow-up questions, encapsulating the consequences of such action, would have shaped a different outcome, as well. Questions about filling out a 4473 or other FFL-type paperwork and paying a small ransom just to file and verify said information through NICS. These are the kinds of things that most folks oppose.

If there was a way to check, leave zero paper-trail/footprints, and cap costs to what the transaction of information actually costs (few dollars at best), I think you might find more support. However, you’d have to do something to overcome the current level of distrust you, the politicians, this tact has exacerbated.

The result of the disparity is “pro-gun” provisions which are actually very strong anti-gun provisions: The supposed ban on federal firearms registration authorizes federal gun registration. The supposed strengthening of FOPA’s interstate transportation protection exempts two of the worst states (the reason why FOPA was needed in the first place), and provides any easy path for every other abusive state to make FOPA inapplicable.

Anyway, folks ought to stop throwing this figure around. It’s not remotely representative, the response was decidedly shaped by the question, and as a result, when many hear it mentioned, they tune out. It’s a subtle way of saying, “I’m not prepared to work with you on our rights”.

“I won’t get political on anyone here today, but if the gun industry was as regulated as my industry, we’d have a lot less issues, if you will.”

Wait, what? Someone who can scarcely manage the production of an over-priced, sometimes-running electric car has the nerve to make an non-sequitur aside at firearms?

If anything, the largest difference is one of privilege (vehicles, driving), and constitutional rights (2nd Amendment). And second, by that logic, certain urban centers in this great nation of ours should be an oasis of low-crime (looking at you DC, Chicago, Philly, NYC).

I’m not discounting further efforts that we ought to make to keep weapons out of the hands of criminals, the mentally ill, but it’s sad to see yet another smart individual equate more laws with less crime.

]]>https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2013/04/26/tony-posawatz-fisker-waxes-on-adoption/feed/2JamfishBusy year…https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/busy-year/
https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2013/04/18/busy-year/#respondThu, 18 Apr 2013 19:18:13 +0000http://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/?p=1021Infrequent posting due to work, family (just had our 4th!), and life. Twitter is tempting, but I miss the long form.

I know a lot of folks feel on edge based on current events and our administration’s various agendas. But please hang in there; the fight for our 2nd Amendment (and other) rights won’t be going away any time soon.

No matter who is in power, individual liberty will always stand athwart big government.

[Incidentally, I’ve published some older posts from last year, and even January, that I just didn’t feel up to throwing out there during and after a revolting election season. I re-evaluated them and felt they should be there. Obvioiusly, these issues have been long sorted out, or are still in the process.]

As is true with so much of our politics — and I think this is detestable — the bottom-line consequences of what they seek are minor in the extreme. What is really sought is an encoded-into-law declaration of the legal supremacy of one culture over another, to the extent that the culture which has lost this political debate is actually now illegal and cannot exist as it previously had. … This isn’t about $3-6 per month, of course. It’s specifically about using the law to win a cultural argument through coercive force. If you can’t persuade them, criminalize them.

This will continue and grow worse in 2013. God, please, save us from ourselves.

Police reported that 27 people, including 20 children and six adults were killed in Newtown, Ct., after a lone gunman opened fire during the school day Friday, NBC News reported. The gunman died at the scene.

Orr reports that authorities found two guns on the gunman’s body, a Glock 9 mm pistol and a Sig Sauer pistol. A Bushmaster assault rifle was found in the vehicle, Orr reports.

Meanwhile, a law enforcement official says authorities found more guns inside the school than the initial two that had been reported. The official would not say what type of guns were found but says all the weapons were being traced by state and federal authorities. The official was not authorized to speak to reporters about the investigation and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

A law enforcement source told CBS News’ Pat Milton that casings (spent shells) from a .223 semi automatic rifle were found inside the school.

I’m sure we’ll know more once the flood of speculation slows.In the meantime, please pray for this community.

]]>https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/12/14/i-am-broken/feed/0JamfishAurora Shootings, Federal Money and the 5 Stages of BShttps://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/aurora-shootings-federal-money-and-the-5-stages-of-bs/
https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/aurora-shootings-federal-money-and-the-5-stages-of-bs/#respondTue, 24 Jul 2012 18:28:41 +0000http://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/?p=959As more tragic details came out this weekend about the Aurora murders, we learned more details about the perpetrator, James Holmes.

After more information was revealed about his weapons, gear, and supplies, I wondered, “where does an unemployed med student get the big cash to buy stuff like this?!” Other folks wondered, too…

According to Mike Adams the editor of http://NaturalNews.com, a decent AR-15 rifle costs $1,000 or more all by itself and the shotgun and handgun might run another $800 total. He said spare mags, sights, slings, and so on would have cost at least another $1,000 across three firearms. A bullet-proof vest is easily another $800, and tonly one can guess he cost of the bomb-making gear. With all the specialty body gear, ammunition, booby-trap devices and more, Adams guessed that this is at least $20,000 in weapons and tactical gear, much of which is very difficult for civilians to get in the first place.

It gave the graduate student a $26,000 stipend and paid his tuition for the highly competitive neuroscience program at the University of Colorado in Denver. Holmes was one of six neuroscience students at the school to get the grant money.

Doctoral students receive free tuition, and most get federally sponsored 12-month grants of $26,000, about $500 a week. Holmes, who was not employed, bought an assault rifle, shotgun, two semiautomatic handguns and 6,000 rounds of ammunition in the months leading up to what police called a methodically planned shooting spree.

So, there’s at least one possible source of funding. Not sure if his housing was paid for through this program, but even half that weekly $500 could put quite a dent in one’s budget-for-destruction.

1. The crocodile tears. This includes the False Moment of National Unity, during which people proclaim that events like this bring us together, even as they sharpen their partisan knives for the next step.

2. The blood libel. With no data, motive is assigned to some conservative group or belief. This proves false 100% of the time, but like a tattoo, the accusation can never be entirely removed.

3. The Rorschach test. Every politician and pundit on earth pens an editorial explaining how this one isolated event has a much broader meaning that proves everything he’s been saying for the last 20 years.

4. Something Must Be Done. A national debate ensues on how to make sure that something like this never happens again. This event was a wake-up call and a game-changer. Everything must be on the table. We must not allow a 200-year-old piece of parchment to prevent us from Acting Right Away.

5. Suzy’s Law. Congress vomits forth a bipartisan bill that no member dare vote against. For precisely that reason, the bill includes a litany of unrelated pork and policy for both parties that could never otherwise pass. In exchange for a few billion dollars and a bit of your liberty, the president, surrounded by beaming legislators, offers a few cloying words about “what this town can do when people put their differences aside” and ostentatiously signs “Suzy’s Law”, a new set of rules that, had they been in place before the tragedy, would have made absolutely no difference.

Brilliant, Jeff.

Here is one of the more thoughtful responses to the various one-liners from the pro-(gun)control crowd:

When there is a tragedy like the Aurora shooting we as a society make the same mistake as when there’s a terrorist attack; we focus on the capability. In particular, the tools used to carry out the attack, and where the attack took place. We look for bad stuff, and we want to make the bad stuff go away.
The problem isn’t the capability; the problem is the intent. I could kill every person in a crowded movie theater. So could you. But, I don’t want to do that. I presume you don’t either. Most people don’t. It’s not bad stuff that makes people do bad things, it’s bad people using stuff to do bad things.

More to come, I’m sure.

]]>https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/07/24/aurora-shootings-federal-money-and-the-5-stages-of-bs/feed/0JamfishObamacare: Now the Largest Tax Increase in US Historyhttps://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/obamacare-now-the-largest-tax-increase-in-us-history/
https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/obamacare-now-the-largest-tax-increase-in-us-history/#respondThu, 28 Jun 2012 19:09:03 +0000http://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/06/28/obamacare-now-the-largest-tax-increase-in-us-history/Representative Jeff Landry pointed it out simply and best…

…speaking on the steps of the Supreme Court after a 5-4 ruling upholding the individual mandate as a tax, told a crowd of protesters and counter protesters that the individual mandate is now “the largest tax increase” in U.S. history.
“They basically have said Congress has no limit to its taxing power,” Landry said after the ruling. “This is the largest tax increase on the poor and the middle class in the history of this country . . . it was sold to the American people as a mandate and not a tax.”

And not just a tax, but now a precedent where the Federal government may now levy a special tax on you if you do not comply with their specific directives about what you should buy, or do.

The prudential, reasonable thing to do would have been to strike down the ACA and tell Congress “We don’t however rule today on the constitutionality of ACA as a tax,” thereby leaving open that issue for Congress to try again if it wanted. What Roberts has done is re-write the law.

This is truly a good example of judicial activism; rather than striking down the impermissible, it was rewritten for the legislature. Hardly pragmatic.

Remember: it wasn’t a tax!

If you didn’t feel like the election was going before, it’s definitely on today!

“No, the most basic issue here is not religious morality, individual liberty, or fiscal responsibility. It’s that a society in which middle-aged children of privilege testify before the most powerful figures in the land to demand state-enforced funding for their sex lives at a time when their government owes more money than anyone has ever owed in the history of the planet is quite simply nuts.”

In fact, there’s nothing that screams, ‘setup’ like the faux-hearing that Pelosi created to hear this “testimony” of hers in the first place, followed by her her interview on The View, insisting that the likes of Media Matters for America is a spectacular, unbiased source. That’s just insulting.

Further, that she crys that she is being shut out by Rush Limbaugh. Being on all the talk shows she’s been on, I guess that irony is lost on her. Even more suspect is the personal phone call she received from the President.

But Media Matters insists that’s all hogwash, and it may well be… after all, embedded plays are perfectly ok for Democrats. They’re only cardinals sins for everyone else… it’s all about intentions, after all (and the great pavement that they make on the road to hell).

Mark’s close says it best.

Almost every matter of the moment boils down to the same story: The Left’s urge to narrow the bounds of public discourse and insist that “conventional wisdom” unknown to the world the day before yesterday is now as unquestionable as the laws of physics.

]]>https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/steyn-on-fluke/feed/1JamfishHeads Need to Roll for Gunwalkinghttps://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/heads-need-to-roll-for-gunwalking/
https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/heads-need-to-roll-for-gunwalking/#respondThu, 17 Nov 2011 19:11:28 +0000http://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/?p=913This is a little old (Nov 7th) in the context of our 24hr news cycle, but is well said and bears repeating. From HotAir…

The idea that we need to regulate the wider population more tightly in order to prevent catastrophically moronic operations by the feds gives me a warm glow deep in my libertarian heart. And I do mean catastrophic: Watch this new clip from ace CBS reporter Sharyl Atkisson updating the death toll from gunwalking. It’s not just Brian Terry.

…In a controlled delivery firearms case, guns are traced in the sense that agents closely and physically follow them — they don’t just note the serial numbers or other identifying markers. The agents are thus able to trace the precise path of the guns from, say, American dealers to straw purchasers to Mexican buyers.

To the contrary, Fast & Furious involved uncontrolled deliveries — of thousands of weapons. It was an utterly heedless program in which the feds allowed these guns to be sold to straw purchasers — often leaning on reluctant gun dealers to make the sales. The straw purchasers were not followed by close physical surveillance; they were freely permitted to bulk transfer the guns to, among others, Mexican drug gangs and other violent criminals — with no agents on hand to swoop in, make arrests, and grab the firearms. The inevitable result of this was that the guns have been used (and will continue to be used) in many crimes, including the murder of Brian Terry, a U.S. border patrol agent.

In sum, the Fast & Furious idea of “trace” is that, after violent crimes occur in Mexico, we can trace any guns the Mexican police are lucky enough to seize back to the sales to U.S. straw purchasers … who should never have been allowed to transfer them (or even buy them) in the first place…

Holder’s attempt is to claim that “Bush did it,” so the fact that the GOP is only asking about Holder proves this is all a partisan smear. Well, Bush didn’t do it, actually, and further, the GOP was asking about the Bush era programs too.

So: Holder implicitly claims he can’t release documents because they’re too confidential, but then decides on his own to give them to the press when he thinks it might help them?

Or: Holder ignores a constitutional, lawful demand for information, but then releases information on his own initiative to bail his corrupt, Marc Rich pardon-purchasing ass out?

Either way. It’s hard to say why Holder refused to comply, because he doesn’t offer reasons — he just ignores the requests entirely.

There was no government-to-government coordination like in Operation Wide Receiver, and there may have been something far more sinister at play here than just a botched Federal operation… the resuscitation of nationwide gun control.

…from the beginning the scheme was to pad statistics on U.S. guns in Mexico in order to be in a strengthened position to call for gun bans and strict gun control at a time when it was politically unpopular. Further, the scheme would involve a made-up statistic, out of thin air–90%–which then had to be proved by using civilian gun retailers along the southern border as unsuspecting pawns to walk U.S. guns into Mexico by ATF agents, straw purchasers, and others with connections to Mexican drug cartels.

And the evidence points to the fact that Hillary Clinton was one of the original Administration officials who was ‘in the loop’ on the scheme from the very beginning.

It’s a pity that investigators are limiting their scope (for now) to the DOJ. This may never get back up the chain to President Obama; seldom does. However, we know this administration’s attitude toward the 2nd Amendment, owners of firearms, and the nation’s (legal, responsible) gun culture. The President, frankly, doesn’t need to say anything… his people know his goals and shared them from the beginning.

As for Sec Clinton, we know how Clintons feel about so-called, erroneously named “assault weapons” and the lengths they’ve gone to ban them in the past. We just didn’t expect them to start arming criminal organizations with them on purpose as means to that end.

God willing, more heads at all levels will roll on this… it’s the least we can do for the victims of this government-created chaos.

]]>https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2011/11/17/heads-need-to-roll-for-gunwalking/feed/0JamfishHappy American Censorship Day (aka Fight the SOPA and Protect-IP)https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/happy-american-censorship-day/
https://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/2011/11/16/happy-american-censorship-day/#commentsWed, 16 Nov 2011 21:04:49 +0000http://ironwhirlygig.wordpress.com/?p=909This is some pretty poorly designed legislation that would put all US users at risk. Please head over to AmericanCensorship.org for more details.

The question here isn’t whether the law is well intentioned, or even whether piracy is a huge problem (I’d agree it is). The question is whether this particular approach to combating piracy is worth its costs.
…
Put more simply: good intentions don’t matter. You should know this better than anyone from having watched the FCC become a rogue agency because of the vague and broadly worded language of the Communications Act. Sorting out this mess can’t be left up to the courts: betting the Internet’s future on the unpredictable whims of federal judges is a recipe for disaster and an affront to the rule of law.